"My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse".

- Van Romero, Vice President For Research At New Mexico Institute Of Mining And Technology

You don't say. The expert you're citing would seem to disagree:

Albuquerque Journal
September 21, 2001

Fire, Not Extra Explosives, Doomed Buildings, Expert Says

By John Fleck
Journal Staff Writer

A New Mexico explosives expert says he now believes there were no explosives in the World Trade Center towers, contrary to comments he made the day of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.

"Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail," said Van Romero, a vice president at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. ...

Romero supports other experts, who have said the intense heat of the jet fuel fires weakened the skyscrapers' steel structural beams to the point that they gave way under the weight of the floors above.

That set off a chain reaction, as upper floors pancaked onto lower ones.

Romero said he believes still it is possible that the final collapse of each building was triggered by a sudden pressure pulse caused when the fire reached an electrical transformer or other source of combustion within the building.

But he said he now believes explosives would not have been needed to create the collapse seen in video images. ...

In fact here's been disagreeing for about four years, and it took nothing more than a simple search under "Van Romero" and "New Mexico" to turn this up. You might want to be more careful about checking your sources in the future.

Yeah funny how a person on a public payroll nearing a cozy retirement may sudenly change his mind...Lets look at your link Ahh but you notice he is still trying to find a explosion? Transformers causing sudden pressure pulse waves! seems like subtle clue the man has not really changed his mind at all.

A New Mexico explosives expert says he now believes there were no explosives in the World Trade Center towers, contrary to comments he made the day of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.
"Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail," said Van Romero, a vice president at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.
The day of the attack, Romero told the Journal the towers' collapse, as seen in news videotapes, looked as though it had been triggered by carefully placed explosives.
Subsequent conversations with structural engineers and more detailed looks at the tape have led Romero to a different conclusion.
Romero supports other experts, who have said the intense heat of the jet fuel fires weakened the skyscrapers' steel structural beams to the point that they gave way under the weight of the floors above.
That set off a chain reaction, as upper floors pancaked onto lower ones. Romero said he believes still it is possible that the final collapse of each building was triggered by a sudden pressure pulse caused when the fire reached an electrical transformer or other source of combustion within the building.
But he said he now believes explosives would not have been needed to create the collapse seen in video images.
Conspiracy theorists have seized on Romero's comments as evidence for their argument that someone else, possibly the U.S. government, was behind the attack on the Trade Center.
Romero said he has been bombarded with electronic mail from the conspiracy theorists.
"I'm very upset about that," he said. "I'm not trying to say anything did or didn't happen."

More Kooks to google:
"Anybody who has ever watched a building being demolished on purpose knows, that if you're going to do this, you have to get at the under infrastructure of a building and bring it down."- Peter Jennings, ABC News Live Coverage, 9/11/2001.

"I felt the ground shake, I turned around and ran for my life. I made it as far as the Financial Center when the collapse happened" - NYC EMT Lonnie Penn, Describing The Moments Just Prior To The Collapse Of WTC 2, 9/11/2001.

"There is an explosion at the base of the building … white smoke from the bottom … something happened at the base of the building! Then another explosion.”- WNYW Fox 5 Anchor Describing First Seconds Of The Collapse Of WTC 2 , 9/11/2001.

“It just descended like a timed explosion - like when they are deliberately bringing a building down . . . It was coming down so perfectly that in one part of my brain I was thinking, 'They got everyone out, and they're bringing the building down because they have to.'”- WNYC Radio's Beth Fertig

"When I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, ... I saw low-level flashes ... I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down ... You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw."- NYFD Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory

“It was like a professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."- NYC Paramedic Daniel Rivera

"It was as if as if they had detonated ... as if they had planned to take down a building, boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom "- NYFD Captain Dennis Tardio

"I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building."- NYFD Firefighter Louie Cacchioli

“There was just an explosion in the south tower. It seemed like on television when they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.”- NYFD Firefighter Richard Banaciski

"Heard explosions coming from . . . the south tower . . . There were about ten explosions. . . . We then realized the building started to come down" - NYFD Firefighter Craig Carlsen

"It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . . We originally had thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down"- NYFD Firefighter Edward Cachia

"Somewhere around the middle . . . there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode ... With each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building"- NYFD Captain Karin Deshore

"A debate began to rage because . . . many people had felt that possibly explosives had taken out 2 World Trade"- NYFD Firefighter Christopher Fenyo

The Firefighters are sticking by the their story but have been placed under a gag order seems curious that someone would gag those kooks too!
And then you can google: white smoke 9-11 and find pictures of the base of the buildings just prior to collapse copious amounts of white smoke being emitted from the ground level which is possible sign of Thermite burning.

Rockdad wrote: Yeah funny how a person on a public payroll nearing a cozy retirement may sudenly change his mind...

Yeah, funny how you raise your font size to 18 when you get nailed on a cite. A faculty member nearing retirement is tenured. He can wag his middle finger in the face of any public official he wants, the president included, and there is nothing that the public official can do about it. Any attempt at a punitive firing runs smack into contractual obligations on the part of the school.

Lets look at your link Ahh but you notice he is still trying to find a explosion? Transformers causing sudden pressure pulse waves! seems like subtle clue the man has not really changed his mind at all.

To a paranoiac, maybe. In real life, transformers have been known to explode. Let's take a look at that quote again, shall we?

Romero said he believes still it is possible that the final collapse of each building was triggered by a sudden pressure pulse caused when the fire reached an electrical transformer or other source of combustion within the building.

No scheming pieces of electrical machiniery suggested, just a simple, physical cause and effect. We're left with the reality that you've pulled a Rex. You've cited somebody as a corroborating witness whose testimony is not supportive, and then tried to bluster your way past the fact that you got called on it. That being the case, we don't need to check your other sources. You've already trashed your own credibility on this issue.

Listen, a government as ruthless and powerful at the one that would have been needed to pull this off would never have needed to do something like this.

If your conspiracy states that it was to get us into Iraq--we were ALREADY in Iraq, maintaining the no-fly zones and such. A government as ruthless as this could have caused a much better provocation on Iraqi soil. Theoretically, they could have done it a lot cheaper and easier--and without congessional oversight.

If your conspiracy stheory insists that it was for the oil, you should realize that a government that could pull off 9/11 could simply take the oil(and we can now) without having to pay to repair the damage caused by the falling buildings.

Finally, a government powerful and ruthless enough to pull 9/11 off would also have 'discovered' WMDs exactly where it said they were, it would have 'caught' Bin Laden---hell, if they were realy trying to hit Iraq, there would have been clear tracks leading back to Saddam.

But none of that happened. Instead, the adminstration flounders along, inept and clueless.

Think about it

"Life is like a box of razor blades. Sharp, shiny, and good for removing unwanted body hair"

The man said it was caused by explosives and then retracts it? seems a lot of people feel the effects of political pressure but tranformers exploding with enough force to sever the massive verticle columns? Transformers are fiiled with non-flamable cooling oil and copper wire coils seems a bit far fetched to me! in fact most transformer explosions are really just very smokey fires they may pop a manhole up a bit but that is it. And explosive transformers on every floor in just the right place? With explosions that can cut columns that are three inches thick? It also seems to me that the majority of this wonder fuel burned outside of the buildings as shown in massive fire balls.

You've already trashed your own credibility on this issue.

Seems like your getting very hostile when I pointed out the fallacy of your argument as far as credibility I was there saw it, inspected and touched the columns in question in fact they were even larger and more massive than the ones pictured! I have the tee shirt so I feel I am more credible than you sir! In fact try Scholars for 9/11 Truth these are distinguished PHD'ed scholars and scientist's that question the "official story"

Related story: In the last few day's during the Zacarias Moussaoui trial a FBI official has testified they had information prior to 9-11, and Norman Minetta in public testimony has alluded to such and now today they are suggesting that it may end in a mistrial...The case against Cheney is more powerful than the case against Moussaoui

Listen, a government as ruthless and powerful at the one that would have been needed to pull this off would never have needed to do something like this.

If your conspiracy states that it was to get us into Iraq--we were ALREADY in Iraq, maintaining the no-fly zones and such. A government as ruthless as this could have caused a much better provocation on Iraqi soil. Theoretically, they could have done it a lot cheaper and easier--and without congessional oversight.

If your conspiracy stheory insists that it was for the oil, you should realize that a government that could pull off 9/11 could simply take the oil(and we can now) without having to pay to repair the damage caused by the falling buildings.

Finally, a government powerful and ruthless enough to pull 9/11 off would also have 'discovered' WMDs exactly where it said they were, it would have 'caught' Bin Laden---hell, if they were realy trying to hit Iraq, there would have been clear tracks leading back to Saddam.

But none of that happened. Instead, the adminstration flounders along, inept and clueless.

Think about it

It is called a FALSE FLAG operation to justify the actual occupation of Iraq I remember GW stating that one of the reasons we went in was because they were shooting at our planes what a joke!
As for Oil you will notice that we protected all of the oil facilities but not the Nuke reactor?
Bush family is buddies with Bin laden family in fact financed his failed businesses and do we want to catch the man alive? He stated right after 9-11 that he did not do it! Many months later a laptop is found in Afganistan with a video of a man that did not even resemble Binny stating he did it funny thing he was wearing a gold ring Muslims do not wear jewerly and the man was writing something with his right hand Binny is known to be left handed! Binny will not be allowed to testify if ever found.
A government this ruthless needs a cover story in order to satisfy the masses!
Is it scary? fuck yes it is scary what to do next? I do not have a clue there except we need critical mass to take back the country!

lurker wrote:Why can't a government that powerful and ruthless as the one that brought down the WTC keep you quiet, Rockdad? Or any of the others who think they've 'discovered' the truth?

Why would a government so powerful--powerful enough to pull this off without a single conspirator talking, let you or anyone 'out' them?

If they ARE allowing this, there has to be some reason, some benefit to having it be known that they are the ones who actually brought down the towers.

What is it?

This is a very good question but then some people have been removed from job's, found dead by suicide, disappeared, Gag orders, convictions of child porn after they take the suspects computer seems to be a trend to make the person a un-credible monster etc I think the critical mass is starting to form and they may not be able to shut everyone up now!

Rockdad wrote:The man said it was caused by explosives and then retracts it? seems a lot of people feel the effects of political pressure but tranformers exploding with enough force to sever the massive verticle columns? Transformers are fiiled with non-flamable cooling oil and copper wire coils seems a bit far fetched to me!

Which points to the problem with what you're attempting - it's a pick and mix. You cite somebody as an authority in support of your position, and when somebody else points out that said alleged authority is on the record as not speaking in support of your position, you say "and you're listening to that guy?". You can't have it both ways, Rockdad. He either is a credible source or he isn't.

Pointing to the physical implausibility of what he was suggesting would merely make the case for the latter. Let's take a look at the name of that school, again.

"New Mexico Institute Of Mining And Technology"

That should raise a red flag. Figuring out what would cause a building collapse is something that a structural engineer would do. We're getting testimony from somebody at a school of mining? That left me a little curious, so I went looking for the man's resume and came up with this:

A bright enough guy, no doubt, but not really one with applicable expertise in this area. But let me guess - I'm persecuting you by bringing this up, the same way I was by pointing out the inconvenient fact that you lied by ommission about what this supposed source had said, and then tried to bluster people into not noticing that awkward little detail?

A government this ruthless needs a cover story in order to satisfy the masses!

But this one? What do they gain by having to spend billions on New York?

And the conspiracies tend to trip over one another--on the one hand you say thatthe Bush family is friends with the Bin Laden family--as if that's some kind of smoking gun, and then you insist that Bin Laden didn't do it---which detroys that smoking gun.

How does this particular scenario, falling as it must, with this ruthless government in control of how it falls, benefit these people?

Why are you being allowed to talk? Why hasn't that web site been shut down--before it exposes Bush?

It doesn't make sense, it doesn't hang together.

"Life is like a box of razor blades. Sharp, shiny, and good for removing unwanted body hair"

I did not lie by omission you uncovered more than I is all!
I was referencing his original quote! which I tend to find more creditable even with your research as far a physics scholar having a opinion it seems relevant to me? as far as persecuting me I did not feel that at all I just felt hostility in your reply sort of like kill the messenger sort of attitude and now you base your whole argument against my position by this one omission what about all the other voices including all the firefighters that saw and heard the ground level explosions?
“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."- Arthur Schopenhaues

Rockdad wrote:This is a very good question but then some people have been removed from job's, found dead by suicide, disappeared, convictions of child porn

But the good news is that they have sex with Sandra Bullock or Julia Roberts before they get taken out. Where have you been? Academics who've ripped into administrations on a continuing basis are a dime a dozen, and you are still left sidestepping the issue for which you have no answer.

Tenure. Academia does not work on a "hire or fire at will" basis, the way the corporate world does, and it never has, at least not in living memory.

What I find amusing about your pitch is the nonfalsifiability of it all. Does a piece of evidence seem to not support your theory, the way you claimed it would? Oh, it's just part of the conspiracy, the men in black covered it up. Does somebody call you on the fact that you've been less than completely forthcoming about what somebody said? He's just doing that because he's "hostile" and has it in for you. No matter what comes up suggesting that in this case, things are exactly as they seem, you just come up with another conspiracy as needed.

Go look up "Occam's razor" or "Ockham's razor" (both spellings have been used), and consider shaving with it a little more closely.

A government this ruthless needs a cover story in order to satisfy the masses!

But this one? What do they gain by having to spend billions on New York?

And the conspiracies tend to trip over one another--on the one hand you say thatthe Bush family is friends with the Bin Laden family--as if that's some kind of smoking gun, and then you insist that Bin Laden didn't do it---which detroys that smoking gun.

How does this particular scenario, falling as it must, with this ruthless government in control of how it falls, benefit these people?

Why are you being allowed to talk? Why hasn't that web site been shut down--before it exposes Bush?

It doesn't make sense, it doesn't hang together.

I am not a scholar nor do I think I have all the answers! My points about the Bin Laden family and Bush family are fact and to me seem to fit together nicely why were the Bin ladens the only ones flying all over the country the next few days even rescue workers could not fly?.
As far as the Billions wasted the building were a nightmare for a owner as previously noted low occupancy, asbestos liability, etc
The new owner made money on the deal though and will get new buildings out of the deal!
How can they shut down all the websites this is still America not China and I do not think all of congress is involved? If they tried to silence everyone it would add credibility to the truth movement

Well I do not need to look it up the most simple theory that I see is controlled demolition! look at the video of building seven falling down, the fact the the only skyscrapers to fall because of fire ever fell on that day supposedly. Many other skyscrapers have completely burned top to bottom and did not fall!
The official crap line is the one that requires great leaps of faith!

Rockdad wrote:I did not lie by omission you uncovered more than I is all!

Yeah, right. You couldn't do a Yahoo search on your own? Wait, I forgot - you were busy having sex with Sandra Bullock or Julia Roberts, in the moments before the MIBs took you out. You're probably too exhausted to see straight.

I was referencing his original quote! which I tend to find more creditable

Read: "more useful".

even with your research as far a physics scholar having a opinion it seems relevant to me? as far as persecuting me I did not feel that at all I just felt hostility in your reply sort of like kill the messenger sort of attitude and now you base your whole argument against my position by this one omission what about all the other voices including all the firefighters that saw and heard the ground level explosions?[/i]

You've already established yourself as a liar and a nut, and I don't have enough hours in the day to run down every bit of BS a liar or a nut has to share with me. The way I chose this particular piece of BS of yours to focus in on, was to randomly grab one of the names you cited and look the guy up. I hit pay dirt on my first try, which should tell any reasonable person exactly what should be expected from you: more of the same, piled higher and deeper.

Many of this have seen this game played before. Lacking any credible sources, you simply pull a long list of names out of your hat, demand that any critic of your argument chase down each and every one, and hope to win, not by making the most sense, but by merely getting the other side to exhaust itself until it decides that it just doesn't want to be bothered. If the rest of us accept those crazy terms, you can prove anything you want. But then you already knew that, didn't you?

Are you a Hugh mungus sock puppet? sounds like the same hostility and strange inability to continue a civil discussion and the same repeating over and over again of one little point and the same unwillingness to concede anyone may have a opinion other than yours?

was to randomly grab one of the names you cited

This is where I think you are lying!
Anyhow I am happy you are to busy to continue your diatribes without any fact's
Just hostility...

Well I do not need to look it up the most simple theory that I see is controlled demolition!

Working from what base of expertise do you formulate that opinion? Oh, sorry, I forgot - you've already said that you're "not a scholar", so if we notice any holes in your theory large enough to fly the space shuttle though, hey, shame on us for bringing that up.

look at the video of building seven falling down, the fact the the only skyscrapers to fall because of fire ever fell on that day supposedly. Many other skyscrapers have completely burned top to bottom and did not fall!

In other words, you're comparing burning carpeting to burning jet fuel? But let's hear the names, addresses and owner contact info for all of these fire-destroyed skyscrapers. I've had my laughs, already. It's only fair that somebody else get to have his.

sounds like the same hostility and strange inability to continue a civil discussion

How does one gently bring up the fact that somebody else lied, and that one can prove this to be the case? There is nothing uncivil about honestly pointing out somebody else's bad behavior, and you've behaved atrociously.

and the same repeating over and over again of one little point

Wrong on so many different levels. The fact that you lied about what a cited source wrote is hardly a "small point", and the fact of the matter is that having been caught in a lie, you've tried to sidestep the issue. You present a piece of sophistry and I present a rebuttal. If I've sometimes repeated myself, it's only because I've been responding to somebody who's been doing the same.

and the same unwillingness to concede anyone may have a opinion other than yours?

Where facts are confirmable, opinion must give way or forfeit its claim to our respect. I've presented you with facts that are confirmable by point and click. Accept them or don't. I'm not your therapist and it's not my job to try to get you to live in the real world.

was to randomly grab one of the names you cited

This is where I think you are lying!

What were you complaining about, just a second ago? Oh yes - incivility.

Anyhow I am happy you are to busy to continue your diatribes without any fact's. Just hostility...

And of course, I've already provided links to references supporting my claims, leaving you in the position of saying "ignore the man behind the curtain", while you whine about the fact that I rebutted your arguments. How very mean of me.

I've had enough of you. You're clearly out of your mind, and a worthy addition to my ignore file. Don't send me any PMs or e-mail, I don't want to hear from you again. Understood?

Well I do not need to look it up the most simple theory that I see is controlled demolition!

I have not postulated a theory only been pointing out what I feel are holes in the official story line I am sure you feel that terrorist's that could not even get out of Cessna flight school turned those jet's around at thirty thousand feet and at 600mph found the targets? sounds very reasonable to me! And the fact that no substantial pieces of aircraft wreckage have been found that could positively ID the craft is reasonable? or that a Firefighter has testified that three black boxes were found but was quickly dismissed
but sure this is also the first time that a intact aircraft over a land crash site turned up no black boxes? all sounds reasonable to me!

as far as completely gutted skyscrapers not falling here are a few quick Google links:

Well I do not need to look it up the most simple theory that I see is controlled demolition

Rockdad, do you know what it takes to wire a building for controlled demolition? Do you not understand that people would have seen the charges, the wiring and the mechanisms?

My points about the Bin Laden family and Bush family are fact and to me seem to fit together nicely

Your points about the Bin Laden family contradict one another. On the one hand you say that Bush is friends with the Bin Ladens, implying that he's in cahoots with them--and then you say that Bin Laden didn't do it.

So, if Bin Laden didn't do it, what does it matter if Bush is friendly with the Bin Laden family? They are--according to what you've said--not guilty of anything.

And if the owner of the WTC made money from the incident, how does that tell us that Bush did it for him?

These are unrelated, often far-fetched and self contradictory ideas that you're trying to weave a cohesive rationality out of, Rockdad. And it just doesn't work.

In the end it comes down to this--the exact same purported cabal could do all the things that they are accused of better, cheaper, and with a whole lot more support from the people of this country than they've gotten post-9/11. So why didn't they? What does this gain them that no other scenario could?

"Life is like a box of razor blades. Sharp, shiny, and good for removing unwanted body hair"

sounds like the same hostility and strange inability to continue a civil discussion

How does one gently bring up the fact that somebody else lied, and that one can prove this to be the case? There is nothing uncivil about honestly pointing out somebody else's bad behavior, and you've behaved atrociously.

What was gentle about it you have been rude and hostile the whole time Hugh

and the same repeating over and over again of one little point

Wrong on so many different levels. The fact that you lied about what a cited source wrote is hardly a "small point", and the fact of the matter is that having been caught in a lie, you've tried to sidestep the issue. You present a piece of sophistry and I present a rebuttal. If I've sometimes repeated myself, it's only because I've been responding to somebody who's been doing the same.

and the same unwillingness to concede anyone may have a opinion other than yours?

It was a small point compared to all the holes in the official story!
Where facts are confirmable, opinion must give way or forfeit its claim to our respect. I've presented you with facts that are confirmable by point and click. Accept them or don't. I'm not your therapist and it's not my job to try to get you to live in the real world.

More insults and condescending attitude

Anyhow I am happy you are to busy to continue your diatribes without any fact's. Just hostility...

You've already established yourself as a liar and a nut, and I don't have enough hours in the day to run down every bit of BS a liar or a nut has to share with me.

I've had enough of you. You're clearly out of your mind, and a worthy addition to my ignore file. Don't send me any PMs or e-mail, I don't want to hear from you again. Understood?

I do not understand could you continue as you always do repeating yourself!
All this hostility sounds like I did find a sock puppet! Me thinks you protest too much!
I did not lie anywhere you did not point out a lie! The man said what he said you pointed out that later he cahnged his story that does not make me a liar!
Do not worry I will never PM you why would I? I will PM a moderator and ask them to compare IP addresses!. You whole tone/words/quotes are exactly the same as the other problem poster Hugh Mungus
I am happy you have taken your illlogical sock off this thread! Funny how you bring up Ignore list that is just what I did to your other puppet a while back and just let you know the other day what a give away!

Lurker I never said Bin laden did not do it I said he denied it!
Yes I know what it takes to wire a building for a controlled Demo lots of planning and access for drilling, wiring etc I pointed out the reports of nightly power outages, supposed remodeling, removal of bomb dogs, reduced security etc. These are reports I have read by supposed witnesses I can offer no real proof of these stories
The theory I have read was that every ten floors were wired not every floor.
There is evidence by BYU that the building fell at free fall speed the same as if you dropped a billard ball off the roof could this happen if it was pancaking?

Anyhow I do not have any theory I have a lot of unanswered questions and what I see as holes in the Official story line.

I am not making any claim that crazy radical muslims were not involved!
More like co-conspirators.

I left Ground Zero devasted by the carnage it was not until another rescuer sent me the loose change link that I really truly began to question again!
I have my own possible evidence that I brought back that I have not discussed here.
I am not even trying to convince anybody maybe just asking for them to keep a open mind.
And Bob if it bores you why bother with it and why follow the thread? seems silly too!

Bob wrote:So did you submit an art proposal for this or not? Otherwise, the whole shebang is fucking boring, bad science, and off-topic.

I did not start the thread but it seems right on topic to me! we are discussing mostly the method of failure!
Bad science? I am not a scientist but there are many scientist's that question the official story as Bad science.

Well just my opinion but I think the fucking retard is in the White House and that anyone that believes anything he say's is a retard and that includes the Official story line!
And You have a lot of work ahead of you if going to police eplaya for only art related threads!
Anyhow off to work...

funny how a person on a public payroll nearing a cozy retirement may sudenly change his mind

Yeah, but that was after the black helicopters stopped shooting particle beams at his tin foil hat.

Common misconception. The Illuminati don't use black helicopters. That would be the Trilateral Commission.

We don't use particle beams anymore, either. Some smartass in Poughkeepsie discovered that if you sprayed Windex on the tin foil hat, that it worked just as well as the lead. Ever since then, when we haven't been busy telekinetically rearranging the letters in some psych patient's bowl of alphabet soup to gloat about our role in the Kennedy assassination, we've been hard at work looking for new technologies to keep the world safe for vaguely defined evil.

Then again... Disinformation posted as diatribe telling you "you better shut up" or to tell someone "your story is full of contradictions" or even better "are you a sock puppet"... or whatever takes to make persons think poster giving truth is nutjob. Classical disinformation craft. Worthy of Governmental action. VERY impressive...

No better way to skew the topic away from something that may be frightfully close to truth than to tell world how crazy they are, or give alternate, more plausable but less correct, version. Plenty of incidences of that for past number of decades... or less.

Have nice day. Or not.
_________________

This skewed message brought to you by Apokiliptika Buerau of Disinformation and operational anarchy... bringing good things to doom...